New Animation Coming Monday
Monday, David Essman and I will release our latest animated editorial cartoon, mocking those "lifestyle environmentalists" who think recycling and driving a hybrid car makes a difference. Stay tuned.
posted by Ted Rall at
3:46 PM
9 Comments:
What's your beef with environmentalists? It's great to have a healthy cynicism about our impact in the world, but I'd rather have barely useful passion than apathetic idleness. By my count, you're down on most environmentalists, vegetarians, and protesters. Ideally, yeah, people would be more effective. But we aren't engineered that way.
Oh, Christ Rall!! Why don't we all just kill ourselves!! It's all so fucking hopeless, so let's just commit communal suicide.
Ted Rall: you can count on him for solutions.
Yeah, the manufacture of any car, hybrids included, takes a terrible toll on the environment, and they all require vast swaths of pavement to travel on. Moreover, those who could afford to purchase these hybrids probably command an income that would make them consumers on the order that stresses sustainability in many other ways.
As far as recycling goes, I think it's good, and helps keep the environment cleaner, at least. In the bleak panel you've presented with this post the beach is littered with rubbish, in fact it shows one bird strangled by plastic refuse, the whale could have a bellyfull of the same. It's true , current levels of recycling don't prevent scenes like this from happening, but there has to be a starting point somewhere.
The image is quite a teaser.
It's a topic I'm glad to see you tackle.
SDS,
A lot of "environmentalists" are ignorant and delusional.
Here's a good example: in my town, there's a trendy restaurant that is very proud that they use compostable plates and cutlery.
I looked into what they were doing, and learned that they were importing the stuff from Asia. This is great. My disposable plate comes half-way around the world so that I can feel good about how I'm "making a difference."
People want to be duped by greenwashing. They want to feel good rather than address the serious "inconvenient truth," which is that we need drastic population control and a massive reduction in what we consume.
Thank God most of those polluters have moved away from the environmental oversight of the EPA.
Now they're in Mexico, India,and China. Far from polluting the sea to shining seas, of the USA! :) See how they like dealing with the EPA of those countries.
If you want a cleaner environment, you need more wealth. Wealthier nations have cleaner environments.
To date the wealthier nations have a very strong tendency to out-source their pollution to second- or third-world countries. Out of sight, out of mind. You have the cause and effect mixed-up, 'Shady Pines'.
It's incumbent upon richer nations to pioneer ways to protect the environment, by changing our business models -- as was done successfully for the Ozone Hole. It's incumbent upon us because, as richer, more technologically-advanced countries, we have the R&D budget and the educated researchers, while poor countries don't.
We eat the significant R&D and implementation cost -- which is the thing all the pro-business conservatives balk at -- in order to prove it works. But then we make a crapload of money selling the technology off to the rest of the world. As Americans have done with pretty much every technological advance since about WWI. What part of the American business model do you not understand?
There are too many people on this earth. There are too many people in the United States. Population control, where are you?
Post a Comment
<< Home